|
|
Roland Emmerich, 10,000 B.C.
03/08/2008 Prehistoric epics are hard films to make. There are only so many stories you can tell about mammoth hunters. Besides, dialogue mostly consists of grunts, and, to top it off, most actors just look like they’re playing dress-up. Roland Emmerich’s 10,000 B.C. doesn’t escape these trappings, but I’m almost just happy to see the genre attempted at all. Of course, if Emmerich’s ambition had yielded a worthwhile film, then I’d have been even happier. Emmerich’s film is about a young mammoth hunter named D’Leh (Steven Strait) whose tribe is ravaged by a group of warriors. After they take a number of his friends captive, D’Leh is forced to make his way across uncharted territory in order to save his tribe. In essence, the film's structure is much like Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto, but it lacks that film’s epic grandeur. The film is never able to overcome the fact that the actors do not look their parts. It’s hard to explain, but some actors just look too modern. Russell Crowe looked the part in Gladiator, and, say what you will about 300, but Gerald Butler pulled it off. The 10,000 B.C. actors look like they just came from a party in Beverly Hills. That’s not to say that they’re bad, just miscast. This might be off-putting to hear at first, but I really believe there is a great R-rated film buried in here somewhere. However, the much more commercial PG-13 does not do the film any favors. All the violence in the film is presented in a very bloodless, very-stylized way. No, I’m not endorsing hyper-violent movies, but some movies do benefit from the kind of unpredictability that comes with the territory. Besides, isn’t it almost an injustice to the material to depict these warriors as so soft and cuddly? Of course, none of this is to say that 10,000 B.C. isn’t fun in fits and starts. Some of the action scenes have a gee-whiz factor that is charming. As long as the hunters are going up against prehistorical beasties, 10,000 B.C. is alive and buoyant. However, it is in the scenes in between where the film falls apart. We are treated to scene after scene of shallow musings on “destiny” and “fate.” D’Leh is given some daddy issues that feel hastily written. Emmerich even throws in some mysticism, and since the kitchen sink was not yet invented, he even throws in some kick-in-the-groin jokes. After the well-made The Day After Tomorrow, 10,000 B.C. is a step backward for Emmerich. The scale is just about as big as his previous films, but the film lacks any real sense of fun or purpose. For example, I was looking up some film trivia on IMDb, and I am now informed that the greatest challenge for the film makers was creating a realistic wet saber-tooth tiger. After seeing the film, I have to say that they accomplished that, but I’m not quite convinced that they spent as much time on the scene before it and the scene after it. Comments [post a comment]Comments are closed |
|
Friday, February 10, 2012
Weather: , °
Weather: , °
Post a Comment
E-mail To A Friend
Join The List
Technorati Tags
10,000 BC Roland Emmerich Cinema Review